AB915 — AB 915 is listed on the consent calendar and recommended as due pass to Appropriations; the transcript repeats the item multiple times, likely due to a transcription duplication.
AB1295 — Consent calendar item listed for due pass to Appropriations.
AB1342 — Consent calendar item listed for due pass to Appropriations.
AB1408 — Consent calendar item listed for due pass as amended to Appropriations.
AB745 — AB 745 is presented as a bill by Assembly Member Irwin that would allow investor-owned utilities to finance undergrounding costs through securitization, with the stated goal of lowering costs for ratepayers. The author explains that the bill is permissive, would let utilities seek financing orders, and would prohibit a return on equity for undergrounding projects, replacing higher-cost financing with lower-cost securitized debt recovered through a non-bypassable surcharge. Supporters are invited to testify, and the chair then moves to opposition testimony. Opponents argue the bill’s savings are minimal, that securitization could shift costs onto other customer classes including non-residential customers, and that the bill raises constitutional and financing concerns. After questions and additional opposition comments, the discussion ends with a speaker saying they will support the bill out of committee so the conversation can continue.
AB745 — Item number nine; the motion was due pass to appropriations and the roll was called.
AB745 — Item number nine is voted on.
Ignacio Hernandez — Testified in support on behalf of TURN.
Ignacio Hernandez — Testified on behalf of TURN in support.
Brandon Ebeck — Testified in opposition on behalf of San Diego Gas & Electric and raised concerns about the bill's impact on undergrounding financing.
Laura Parra — Testified in opposition on behalf of Southern California Edison.
Laura Parra — Testified on behalf of Southern California Edison in support.
SB901 — Cited as one of the existing securitization measures already used.
AB805 — Cited as one of the existing securitization measures already used.
AB1054 — Cited as one of the existing securitization measures already used.
AB1423 — AB 1423 is presented as a bill to improve the EV charging experience in California by requiring chargers installed with state grant funding before 2024 to meet forthcoming CEC reliability standards. The author explains that the bill is intended to protect drivers and taxpayers by ensuring publicly funded infrastructure is reliable, then asks for an aye vote. The committee then hears opposition testimony focused on Electrify America, the consent decree, and concerns about redundancy, retroactive application, and the bill’s scope over publicly subsidized chargers. Support is later noted from Assembly Members Calderon and Schiavo, after which the author is invited to close and again requests an aye vote while indicating work will continue to address concerns. The item then proceeds to motion, second, and roll call.
AB1423 — AB 1423 was called up as Item 20 and the committee proceeded with the roll-call vote, with the bill being identified again as the vote continued.
Greg Spooner — Concerned citizen and EV driver; testified in strong support of AB 1423.
Greg Spooner — Identified himself as a physicist and climate activist and strongly opposed the bill in all forms.
Read Addis — Testified on behalf of the Electric Vehicle Charging Association in opposition to AB 1423.
Ryan McCarthy — Testified on behalf of Electrify America.
AB2061 — Cited as a prior bill the witness supported.
Rocky Fernandez — Identified as being with the Center for Sustainable Energy and stated support.
Rocky Fernandez — Spoke with the Center for Sustainable Energy and said he is also a solar homeowner with data-driven opposition.
AB388 — AB 388 is introduced and presented as a green hydrogen bill with three main components: defining green hydrogen as derived from wind and solar, addressing regulatory barriers such as the over-the-fence rule by allowing private power line connections to green hydrogen facilities, and supporting clean energy jobs and worker transition. Supporters argue the bill is necessary to make renewable hydrogen economically viable at scale without shifting costs to non-participating customers and describe it as critical model legislation. Opposition testimony then raises concerns that the bill would broaden the definition of electrical corporation and weaken oversight and ratepayer protections. After public testimony closes, the committee moves AB 388 on a due pass recommendation to Appropriations, and the bill passes out with the roll left open.
AB388 — Item number four is voted on and passes 18-0.
Janice Lynn — Janice Lynn, founder and president of the Green Hydrogen Coalition, introduces herself and explains that California has strong wind and solar resources that could support renewable hydrogen production. She notes that electrolytic hydrogen producers face constraints because the needed renewable electricity is not readily available unless generated on-site or delivered through a constrained grid. She argues that AB 388 would help unlock California’s ability to produce renewable hydrogen at scale in a cost-effective way without shifting costs to non-participating customers, and concludes by describing the bill as critical model legislation in support of the energy transition.
IBEW expert — Introduced as an expert who can speak to the technical aspects of the over-the-fence rule in Section 218.
Rachel Koss — Rachel Koss, speaking for the Coalition of California Utility Employees, explains that the Section 218 change is a narrow, targeted exception intended to make green hydrogen production economically viable.
Rachel Koss — Rachel Koss, representing the Coalition of California Utility Employees, was introduced as being present in support and then testified about why electricity rates are so high, beginning a discussion of rate increases and the impacts of net energy metering (NEM).
Alfredo Redondo — Testified in support on behalf of H-Cycle.
Erin Nemela — Erin Nemela testified in support on behalf of Intersect Power.
Mark Fendetti — Concerned citizen in support.
Brady Vinningland — Presented opposition testimony on behalf of Southern California Edison.
Valerie Terrell — Testified in opposition on behalf of Pacific Gas and Electric Company while acknowledging the value of clean hydrogen.
AB825 — AB 825 is introduced as item 10 and then presented by the author and supporters. The discussion explains that the bill addresses California’s transmission and clean energy infrastructure challenge by creating a public finance program for transmission projects, with benefits flowing through to retail customers and supporting partnerships between utilities and public entities. Witnesses, including Dan Adler, testify in support and describe how the bill clarifies policy variables such as return on equity and capital structure, enables deeper investment discussions, and contemplates using the fund to support revenue bonds and strengthen repayment certainty. The committee then moves the bill, and AB 825 passes to appropriations on a 14-0 vote, with the item left open.
AB825 — Item number 10 is voted on and passes 18-0.
Anna — Name is mentioned, likely the next witness or participant being acknowledged.
Adria Tinan — Introduced as a witness from TURN who will explain AB 825's financing model and speaks in support.
Dan Adler — Dan Adler of Net Zero California is introduced as a witness who will provide a deeper dive into the bill, and shortly thereafter he begins his testimony in support of AB 825, identifying himself as representing Net Zero California.
Setson Perez — Testified in support on behalf of Advanced Energy United.
Scott West — Scott West, speaking for the California Coalition of Utility Employees, said the group had not yet taken a formal position because the bill language had only recently been released. He added that they had been working productively with the author, believed some refinements were still needed to address certain issues, and said they were close to agreement while thanking the Chair for bringing the bill.
Brandon Eva — Spoke on behalf of Pacific Gas & Electric and echoed Scott West's comments.
AB942 — AB 942 is introduced and then discussed in a continuous hearing segment. Supporters describe it as a bill to reform solar subsidy and net energy metering rules to improve equity, reduce cost shifts onto non-solar customers, and save ratepayers money while still allowing solar customers to recover their investment. The testimony also addresses claims that the bill would break contracts, arguing instead that rate structures can be changed by the Public Utilities Commission. Later, the chair summarizes amendments and the remaining provisions of the bill before the discussion turns to extensive opposition testimony. Opponents argue that AB 942 is based on a flawed premise about rooftop solar and electric rates, would violate contracts and undermine trust, raise bills, discourage electrification, reduce home values, and should be rejected in any form.
AB942 — The committee is asked to vote on AB 942, due pass as amended to appropriations.
AB942 — Item number 12 is called; several members are recorded as not voting.
Robert Berrigan — Introduced as Executive Director of ICONCDC and present in support.
Roberto Berrigan — Roberto Berrigan begins his testimony by introducing himself and identifying himself as the executive director of ICON CDC, briefly situating his background in community economic development.
Sarah Flachs — Testified in strong support on behalf of the California Federation of Labor Unions.
Marcus Gomez — Testified in support on behalf of the California Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.